TheNewsGuru

Tag: Ehichioya Ezomon

  • 2023 zoning and aspirants’ pairing permutations [4] – By Ehichioya Ezomon

    2023 zoning and aspirants’ pairing permutations [4] – By Ehichioya Ezomon

    By Ehichioya Ezomon

    In the “Mother of All Elections” in 2023, Nigeria is having a heavy dose of speculative news spread by canvassers for aspirants or the media, particularly the online, that trade in “breaking”, “exclusive”, “shocking” or “explosive” news that’s mostly a tale by moonlight.

    That said, speculations are the ingredients that oil politics, and Nigerians can do with some conjectures in the lead-up to the primaries, and actual polls tentatively to begin in February 2023.

    Scores of aspirants are lining up for the presidential primaries of the registered parties, especially under the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) and the main opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

    There’re talks about the resurgence of a “Third Force” in the form of a “Mega Party” of disparate groups, such as was bandied pre-2019 elections, primed to challenge the dominance of the APC and PDP, and enthrone a “truly progressive democratic culture” in Nigeria.

    But that dream was stillborn, suffocated by its promoters, many of whom are currently beating a familiar path of media visibility, trying to convince sceptical Nigerians to have faith “in the coming order.”

    Actually, a semblance of the platform was launched in Abuja the other day as “The National Movement” with former Governor of Kano State and presidential aspirant, Senator Rabi’u Musa Kwankwaso, superintending.

    Yet, the emphasis is on the APC and PDP, whose aspirants, for lack of a clear-cut zoning, are juggling with presidential or vice presidential slot, by aligning with several aspirants on either side of the equation. Let’s have a checklist of the APC aspirants.

    Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, former Lagos State governor and self-styled National Leader of the APC, is considered as the front runner in the APC, and second only to former Vice President Atiku Abubakar in the entire presidential field for 2023.

    On account of his pedigree in politics, standing in the race for 2023, and the age factor, Asiwaju Tinubu, like Atiku, may be gunning for the presidential seat, and not the vice presidential position.

    Having told President Muhammadu Buhari of his “life-long ambition” to govern Nigeria, Tinubu is being paired in a Muslim-Muslim ticket with Governor Babagana Umara Zulum of Borno State, or a Muslim-Christian tag team with former House of Representatives Speaker, Rt Hon. Yakubu Dogara, Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Boss Mustapha or Plateau State Governor Simon Lalong.

    Vice President Yemi Osinbajo, ticked to run on his record as second-in-command to President Buhari since 2015, or backed by Tinubu if his (Tinubu’s) ambition can’t fly, is paired with Governors Zulum (in a scenario dubbed “Two-eggheads-presidency”), Nasir el-Rufai of Kaduna State, Mai Mala Buni of Yobe, Atiku Abubakar Bagudu of Kebbi or Mohammed Badaru Abubakar of Jigawa.

    Prof. Zulum is joined with Asiwaju Tinubu, Prof. Osinbajo, Governor Kayode Fayemi of Ekiti, Governor Dave Umahi of Ebonyi, former Governors Orji Uzor Kalu (Abia), Rotimi Chibuike Amaechi (Rivers), Timipre Sylva (Bayelsa) or Chris Ngige (Anambra).

    Governor Fayemi, Chairman of the powerful Nigerian Governors’ Forum (NGF), is paired to run with Governor Zulum, Governor Bagudu, Governor Buni or Governor el-Rufai.

    Governor Umahi, who decamped from the PDP in late 2020, owing to the party’s alleged insensitivity to the South-East aspiration for the presidency, has informed President Buhari of his aspiration, and is being coupled with Governors Zulum, Buni, el-Rufai or Bagudu.

    Dr Kalu, the Senate Chief Whip, who prides himself as a pan-Nigerian of “Southern by birth and Northern by growth,” and an early bird that’s postured for the presidency for over a decade, is being tagged with Governors Zulum, el-Rufai, Bagudu, Buni or Badaru.

    Rt Hon. Amaechi, recently turbaned as the “Dan Amanar Dauru (trusted Son of Daura), in President Buhari’s homestead of Daura, Katsina State, is tipped to run with Governor Zulum, Governor Buni, Governor el-Rufai or Governor Bagudu.

    Governor Bagudu, Chairman of the Progressives Governors’ Forum (PGF), is on either way being joined in the ticket with Governor Fayemi, Governor Umahi, Rt Hon. Amaechi or former Governor of Imo State, Senator Rochas Anayo Okorocha.

    Governor Buni allegedly holds onto the APC Caretaker Committee chair as a springboard to his presidential ambition. Thus, he’s being primed to pair with Governor Fayemi, Governor Umahi, Rt Hon. Amaechi, Governor Ben Ayade of Cross River State or Mr Sylva.

    Governor el-Rufai’s once rosy status as the “beautiful bride” of presidential aspirants has been tempered by the clamour to zone the presidency to the South, which he supports. Still, he can pair with Governors Fayemi, Umahi or Ayade, or Rt Hon. Amaechi, Senator Kalu or Senator Okorocha.

    Governor Ayade, not vocal about the presidency, and has presented himself as a pacifist capable of quelling any untoward fallouts from the APC primaries, can pair with Governor Zulum (in another “joint ticket of eggheads”), or Governors el-Rufai, Bagudu or Buni.

    Mr Sylva, lately mentioned in the presidential permutations as the “choice of the Buhari Boys,” is projected to pair with Governor Zulum, Governor el-Rufai, Governor Buni or Governor Bagudu.

    Dr Ngige, who rates himself as the pathfinder (“bringer” in local parlance) of the APC in the South-East, can bond with Governor Zulum, Governor Buni, Governor Bagudu or Governor el-Rufai.

    Owelle Okorocha, who took a faction of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) to the merger talks that produced the APC in 2013, would be a front runner today but for the crisis in the Imo chapter in 2019, as he tried to install his son-inlaw, Uche Nwosu, as his successor in office. Still, the pan-Nigerian polyglot can run with Governors Zulum, Bagudu, Buni or el-Rufai.

    Governor Abubakar hasn’t presented himself as a presidential material for 2023. Yet, in politics, a dark horse can spring surprises, and that accounts for his being matched with Prof. Osinbajo, Governor Fayemi, Rt Hon. Amaechi or Governor Umahi.

    Mr Dogara, whose spat with Bauchi Governor Bala Mohammed reportedly stems from his defection to the APC as a precursor to his 2023 ambition, may run with Asiwaju Tinubu, former Lagos governor and Minister of Works and Housing, Mr Babtunde Fashola or former Osun governor and Minister of Interior, Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola.

    Mr Mustapha’s display of quality leadership in chairing the Presidential Steering Committee (PSC) on COVID-19 pandemic may recommend him for a ticket with Tinubu, Fashola or Aregbesola.

    Governor Lalong wasn’t in the reckoning for the presidency, but his name has come up lately, as the jostling for the prime target in the APC continues to baffle polity watchers. So, he can pair with Asiwaju Tinubu, Mr Fashola or Ogbeni Aregbesola.

    Mr Fashola (SAN) and Ogbeni Aregbesola, protégées of Asiwaju Tinubu, who leads the field of aspirants in the APC, may have to rely on providence to clear their way for a presidential run. Each can pair with Rt Hon. Dogara, Mr Mustapha or Governor Lalong.

    Governor Bello, riding high on the back of leading the youths and women, who’ve been clamouring for his presidency in 2023, may’ve had his ambition cut short by the zoning of the APC chairmanship to North Central (Middle Belt). Yet, in politics, dreams never die!

    Last Line: There’re more aspirants in the APC waiting in the wings to announce their presence in the presidential arena, even as the next serial of this article situates aspirants in the PDP that are already counting the curtains at the Presidential Villa in Abuja.

    Mr Ezomon, Journalist and Media Consultant, writes from Lagos, Nigeria.

  • 2023 zoning and aspirants’ pairing permutations [3]

    2023 zoning and aspirants’ pairing permutations [3]

    By Ehichioya Ezomon

    The rotation of the presidency between the North and South of Nigeria for the 2023 general election remains fluid, even as the number of aspirants for the exalted office swells by the day. No polity watcher can, as yet, put an exact or a reliable figure to it, but scores of aspirants on the platforms of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) and the main opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) have declared, indicated or being wooed or “forced” to announce their intentions to run for president.

    Yes, you read it correctly! Politicians being “forced” to declare for the Office of President of Nigeria. For instance, former Governor of Abia State and Senate Chief Whip, Dr Orji Uzir Kalu, has been taken to court by some support groups in the North, praying for an order to compel him to declare for the 2023 presidency.

    Senator Kalu has called for an “out-of-court settlement,” as the money to litigate the case will go a long in his campaigns were he to contest for the seat he’s advocated should be zoned to the South, and possibly to the South-East that’s long agitated for it.

    Many have canvassed for the presidency to be zoned to Southern Nigeria, expressly as President Muhammadu Buhari, a Northerner, is completing his eight-year tenure in 2023, and it’s expected that going by rotation, the next president should come from the South.

    Yet, the North looks averse to power shifting South, as “it’s lost a term of four years” when President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua died in his third year in office in 2010, before completing the constitutionally and rotationally-guaranteed eight-year tenure of office.
    While the tug-of-war persists between the North and South, some suggest resolving the rotation impasse by allowing the presidency to float – without zoning the office to the North or South.

    In that regard, the party candidates will emerge on the basis of competence from the North or South, and/or from any of the six geopolitical zones of North Central (Middle Belt), North-East, North-West, South-East, South-South (Niger Delta) and South-West.

    Apt as this proposal is, “competence” in Nigeria’s politics is a supposition that doesn’t meet its definition by dictionary.com as, “the quality of being competent; adequacy; possession of required skill, knowledge, qualification, or capacity.”

    Hardly, if any, do these qualities matter to Nigerian politicians, the political parties, power brokers and even the electorate before picking candidates, and voting for same in any elections!
    What matter are aspirants’ tribes, religion, and a war chest to influence their choice as candidates, run their campaigns, and garner votes mostly by means of manipulation of the processes.

    Discarding zoning, and allowing open contest for the presidency in 2023 may result, as usual, in electing the “incompetent” as the “most qualified” by reason of the candidate being able to swing the votes at the primaries, and in the general election.

    As politics is a game of numbers, those canvassing for emergence of “competent” candidates from any part of Nigeria are banking on “producing the right numbers” at the primaries or in the polls.

    And that could mean one thing: Resort to Nigeria’s primordial cleavages, which would benefit aspirants from the Northern part of the country, going by the large number of votes coming from the region at every election.

    Unless the “kingmakers” in the North – as they’d done in past electoral contests, and are boasting of repeating in future elections – allow power to shift to the South, the North will continue to rule Nigeria if the presidency is open to all aspirants from whatever region or geopolitical zone of the country.

    That’s why agitation for rotation of the presidency will be an endless venture for the South and Southern aspirants, a scenario the major platforms of the APC and PDP should resolve in 2023, and arrest the bizarre posturing and positioning of aspirants for the offices of president and vice president at the same time.

    And talking about aspiring for both offices, presidential aspirants of the APC and PDP, and their surrogates or support groups have been “match-making” by pairing themselves with multiple aspirants.

    The criterion for pairing is to join aspirants of different religious affiliations: a Christian-Muslim or a Muslim-Christian ticket, as a Christian-Christian or a Muslim-Muslim presidential ticket seems abhorrent in Nigeria’s polarised political space.
    The only exception was the joint ticket of Chief Moshood Kashimawo Olawale Abiola and Ambassador Babagana Kingibe, both Muslims, in the June 12, 1993, presidential poll, which’s annulled by the military government of Gen. Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida that ordered the election.

    Were that poll, handsomely won by Abiola, to stand, the issue of religion in considering a joint ticket for the presidency would’ve been relegated in subsequent elections since the return of democratic governance in 1999.

    The religious issue reportedly played a role in “depriving” former Lagos State governor and National Leader of the APC, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the post of running mate to the party’s candidate in the 2015 presidential election, former Head of State, retired Gen. Buhari, as both are Muslims.

    Then newly-formed APC, beating the drums of taking over power from the ruling PDP, couldn’t afford a possible backlash from the Christian community were the Muslim-Muslim ticket of Buhari/Tinubu to go against the Christian-Muslim ticket of President Goodluck Jonathan and Vice President Namadi Sambo.

    Tinubu, who came to the 2013 merger table of the Legacy Parties with five states ruled by his Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), to one state governed by Buhari’s Congress for Progressive Change (CPC), was forced to relinquish his vice presidential ambition.

    He’s, however, reportedly given the privilege of nominating an aspirant, and the lot fell on Prof. Yemi Osinbajo, former Lagos State Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice under Tinubu’s administration, who ran with Buhari and won the presidency.

    The poser: Will religion rear its head in determining the 2023 presidential ticket, especially in the APC and PDP? Absolutely! And that makes the pairing permutations dicey for the aspirants.
    Yet, political jugglers are testing the waters for a Muslim-Muslim ticket, to see if it’ll scale through, as in 1993, or leave Nigeria hostage to the scheming of religious demagogues to keep certain persons and groups out of power at the national level.

    As the coast will clear on that front in a matter of weeks, a few aspirants in the crowded presidential field, dominated by serving or past governors, are receiving rave reviews in the pairing calculus.

    Last Line: While there’s talk about a “Third Force” or a Mega Party coming “to disrupt the current system,” Part 4 of this serial focuses on the comical “match-making” of presidential aspirants for joint tickets, beginning with the All Progressives Congress (APC).

     

    *Mr. Ezomon, Journalist and Media Consultant, writes from Lagos, Nigeria.

  • 2023 zoning and aspirants’ pairing permutations [2] – By Ehichioya Ezomon

    2023 zoning and aspirants’ pairing permutations [2] – By Ehichioya Ezomon

    By Ehichioya Ezomon

    As noted in part one of this article on Monday, February 7, 2022, the politicians that welcomed the new civilian administration in 1999 agreed to a gentleman’s arrangement to rotate the presidency between the North and South of Nigeria.

    But for the distortion of the principle in 2011 by President Goodluck Jonathan, a Southerner, the mechanism would’ve run smoothly, at least on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).
    Recall that former Head of State, retired Gen. Muhammadu Buhari, a Northerner, mindful of the “zoning of the presidency to the South” in 1999, ran under the All Peoples Party (APP) against the second term bid of Chief Olusegun Obasanjo of the PDP in 2003.

    And thereafter, Buhari consecutively vied on the platforms of the All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP) in 2007, Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) in 2011 and All Progressives Congress (APC) in 2015, before crowning his long-held ambition that runs out in 2023.

    Dr Jonathan, as vice president, and later president, had completed the first-term tenure of President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, a Northerner, who died in the third year of his presidency in 2010.
    Subsequently, Jonathan, against the understanding for rotation of the presidency between the North and South, contested in the 2011 polls and won, even as there’s a reported agreement by the North to allow him a single term of four years – between 2011 and 2015 – before the office would revert to the North.

    Nonetheless, Jonathan’s rule in those four years short-changed the North of its eight-year-tenured presidency under the rotation agenda. That’s why in the 2023 election cycle, zoning of the seat has become intensely contentious, and hazier, as to which region – North or South – should produce the next president.

    The argument for rotation of the presidency weighs heavily in favour of the South, considering that President Buhari will be completing his eight years of two terms of four years each in 2023.
    So, in the lead-up to the polls, the expectation, and urging is that the South will produce the next president on the basis that the political parties, especially the ruling APC and the main opposition PDP, will zone the seat to Southern Nigeria.

    However, a section of the political class and the intelligentsia in the North feels otherwise, and strongly canvasses for the North to retain the presidency beyond President Buhari’s tenure in 2023, so as to equal or surpass the number of years that the South has ruled Nigeria since the return of democracy in 1999.

    For the record, the South has produced two presidents in former Head of State, Dr Obasanjo and Dr Jonathan, cumulatively governing for 14 years, with Obasanjo ruling from 1999 to 2007, and Jonathan from 2010 to 2015.

    Conversely, within the timeframe of 24 years, between 1999 and 2023 (when Buhari will round off his tenure), the North has produced two presidents – the late Yar’Adua and Buhari, whose years of governance would be 11, with Yar’Adua ruling from 2007 to 2010, and Buhari from 2015 till 2023.

    And that’s the puzzle of the matter! The North insists on producing the next president, to compensate for its “loss” of four (or five) years from eight years the region would’ve controlled power, but for the death of President Yar’Adua barely three years in office.

    But polity watchers argue that retaining power in the North, after Buhari in 2023, would disrupt further the rotation of office of the president between the North and South of Nigeria.

    Certainly, were this scenario to succeed, the North would’ve had additional four years, in the first instance, from 2023 to 2027, and the likelihood of another four years between 2027 and 2031, to complete the presidential cycle of eight years.

    In other words, the North, since 1999, would’ve aggregately ruled the country for 15 years or 19 years, resulting in one or five years more than the period of 14 years that the South has governed.

    This has the potential to set a dangerous precedent of tit-for-tat between the North and South, as each tries to grab power at the centre, and thus deepens the level of polarisation in the system.

    Worrying as this picture might look, the North doesn’t seem to care, as its sole interest is in equalling or surpassing the number of years that the South has ruled the country since 1999.

    Bauchi State Governor Bala Mohammed restated the North’s stand in late January 2022, as he received a report from the Contact and Consultation Committee he set up for his presidential ambition.

    Mohammed said: “We are aware of the agitations of the southern part of the country because the leader of the country today, President Muhammadu Buhari, who is from the North, will finish his tenure in 2023; so power should rotate to the South.

    “But I want to say that I am in PDP, I am not in APC. It is the APC that has this burden (of zoning the presidency to the South). In my party, the last president was from the South, and he was my President, Goodluck Ebele Jonathan.

    “During this period, my party was at the centre for 16 years (and) 14 of those years were led by the people from the South. So, where is the justice and the justification (for the North to relinquish power)? Therefore, it is the turn of the North (to produce the next president).

    “While Governor Mohammed is concerned about zoning under the PDP, some are theorising a situation in which all political parties will field only Northern presidential candidates in the 2023 polls – a semblance of the 1999 zoning – and whoever wins on whatever political platform will govern for only one term of four years.

    The reasoning is that the outcome of such an arrangement would almost balance the number of years – 15 and 14, in that order – that the North and South have ruled the country, and then, the rotation of the presidency between the two regions would begin afresh.

    The problem with this theory is twofold. First, which of the regions – North or South – will take the first shot at the presidency in 2027? If it’s the North, it would’ve consecutively completed 12 years in the saddle, and accumulatively 15 years overall.

    That’s, Yar’Adua’s three years plus Buhari’s eight years and the contemplated four-years post-Buhari presidency, thus surpassing, by one year, the South’s 14 years in power since 1999.
    Second, due to “sweetness of power,” there’s a possibility of the North insisting on another four years, from 2027 to 2031 – in an eight-year tenure – to progressively make it 16 years of unbroken presidency by the region, and a total of 19 years in power, and five years more than the South’s rulership of Nigeria since 1999.

    What a vicious cycle that would be were the South to emulate the North when power returned to it in whatever year! It’d be a mockery of the rotation principle designed to equitably distribute power, every eight years, between the North and South of Nigeria.

    Last Line: Part 3 of this serial will examine zero-zoning or open contest of the presidency based on “competence” and the gambit of a “Muslim-Muslim” joint ticket, as it’s in the Military annulled June 12, 1993, presidential election.

     

    *Mr. Ezomon, Journalist and Media Consultant, writes from Lagos, Nigeria.

  • 2023 zoning and aspirants’ pairing permutations [1] – By Ehichioya Ezomon

    2023 zoning and aspirants’ pairing permutations [1] – By Ehichioya Ezomon

    By Ehichioya Ezomon

    Owing to the indeterminate zoning of the presidency barely 12 months to the 2023 general election, politicians from the North and South of Nigeria are posturing, positioning and simultaneously strategising for the positions of president and vice president.

    Mostly involved in this game of juggling of offices are aspirants of the dominant platforms of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) and the main opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

    The aspirants engage in the scheming to avoid being caught napping when the zoning pendulum finally rests either in the North or South. So, in the arena is a kind of split-personality switching of positions by already publicised or potential aspirants.

    For instance, a Mr A, a Southerner, postures for the president on the assumption that the office will be zoned to the South. Alternately, he’s positioning himself for the post of vice president on the condition that the presidential seat goes to the North. Ditto for the Northerner, who’s angling for either of the positions!

    Politicians that ushered in the new democratic administration in Nigeria in 1999 foresighted this scenario, and hashed out a rule-of-the-thumb arrangement that, going forward, the presidency should rotate between the North and South every eight years.

    In particular, the previously acclaimed leading political party, the PDP, places emphasis on zoning of elective positions, and has tried to respect the formula in picking its presidential candidate.

    Thus, beginning from 1999, Southern Nigeria took the first shot at the presidency, with the post micro-zoned to the South-West, which fielded retired General and former Head of State, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo of the PDP, and former Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Chief Olu Falae of the All Peoples Party (APP).

    The micro-zoning of the presidency to the South-West was to placate the region for the denial of the office that’s convincingly and comprehensively won in the June 12, 1993, election by a South-westerner and billionaire business magnate, Chief Moshood Kashimawo Olawale Abiola.

    The military regime of Gen. Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida, which ordered the election, annulled it when Chief Abiola was coasting home to victory, as evident from the partially-declared results.

    Let’s have a flashback to that election, described as a watershed, and considered by local and international observers as the freest, fairest and most credible in Nigeria’s electoral history till date.

    An article by the influential New York Times of June 24, 1993, a day after the poll annulment, stated that, “… although voter turnout was light by past standards, there was no evidence of the violence and vote-rigging that marred the last round of balloting (in 1983), nearly a decade ago. Foreign observers generally described the elections as free and fair.”

    Broken only by the four-year government of President Shehu Shagari (1979-1983), the military had had a spell of 23-year rule (1966-1979 and 1983-1993) since the first coup of January 1966.

    So, prior to ordering the 1993 poll for two government-established political parties, the Social Democratic Party (SDP) and National Republican Convention (NRC), the regime of self-styled ‘Military President’ Babangida had embarked on a convoluted electoral process to return Nigeria to a democratic system.

    The Babangida government had allowed the Prof. Henry Nwosu-headed National Electoral Commission (NEC) the full rein to organise and conduct the election for Chief Abiola of the SDP and Alhaji Bashir Tofa of the NRC.

    But in fishing for excuses to annul the franchise, the military not only heaped blames on the NEC for tolerating electoral malpractice, allegation that poll observers dismissed, but also said that on account of the plethora of lawsuits that attended the electoral process, the government had to take steps “to save our judiciary from being ridiculed and politicised locally and internationally.”

    In truth, it’s the military clique that engineered series of subterfuges, including sponsoring the notorious Association for a Better Nigeria (ABN), led by maverick billionaire, Senator Arthur Nzeribe, at which behest one Ambibola Davies obtained court injunctions in Abuja, first on June 10, 1993, to stop the election from holding; on June 14, 1993, to stop further announcement of the results, which the NEC obeyed on June 16, 1993, and halted declaration of the results; on June 17, 1993, pro-democracy activists obtained two Lagos high courts’ orders for the NEC to declare the full results; and on June 23, 1993, the Abuja high court, in reaffirming its June 10, 1993, ruling prohibiting the NEC from conducting the election, declared the poll “null and void.”

    Taking advantage of the Abuja court pronouncement, the Babangida government cancelled the election on June 23, 1993, and suspended the NEC, whose June 14, 1993, “interim results showed Abiola (and the SDP) leading with an overwhelming majority in 19 states, while Tofa (and the NRC) had a clear majority in 11 states.”

    But due to widespread protests against the annulment, the military junta, in the infamous “stepping aside” of Gen. Babangida on August 27, 1993 – the date the National Defence and Security Council (NDSC), empanelled by Babangida on January 5, 1993, to replace the Armed Forces Ruling Council (AFRC), had promised to hand over to a democratic government – installed an Interim National Government (ING) headed by Chief Ernest Shonekan.

    The ING lasted only 83 days before Gen. Sani Abacha, left behind as Chief Army Staff/Secretary of Defence by the retreating Gen. Babangida, leveraged on a November 10, 1993, Lagos high court judgment by Justice Dolapo Funlola Akinsanya, voiding the ING as illegal, to oust Shonekan, and declare himself as Head of State.

    Besides refusing to honour the June 12 poll, and install Abiola as President of Nigeria, Gen. Abacha, terrorised the country through sponsored assassinations and disappearances of opposition figures, and instituted fresh electoral processes that critics said were primed to enable him transmute into a civilian president.

    But Abacha died suddenly on June 8, 1998, and was succeeded by Gen. Abdulsalami Abubakar, then Chief of Defence Staff, on June 9, 1998. Coincidently on July 7, 1998, a month after Abacha’s death, Abiola, who’d audaciously declared himself President in 1994, also died in a mysterious circumstance.

    After a further stay in power for six years (1993-1999), the military, under Gen. Abubakar, returned Nigeria to democracy in 1999, handing over power to President-elect, Chief Obasanjo, who kicked off rotation of the presidency between the North and South.

     

    *Mr. Ezomon, Journalist and Media Consultant, writes from Lagos, Nigeria.

  • Ekiti primaries and defeats of the big guns – By Ehichioya Ezomon

    Ekiti primaries and defeats of the big guns – By Ehichioya Ezomon

    By Ehichioya Ezomon

    In Ekiti politics, every notable politician claims to be a kingmaker. None, at least openly, acknowledges having been assisted by others to climb the ladder to where they’re politically.

    That’s why at every election, they, too, want to be the king, as witnessed in last week’s primaries by the two dominant political platforms, for the June 18, 2022, governorship poll in the state.

    So, to keen watchers of the polity, the results of the primaries weren’t much of a surprise, but the bombshell is the free-fall of the big-name and mighty politicians that took part in the processes.

    In spite of the larger-than-life image carved for themselves, many of the aspirants, without even casting a ballot, had foreseen defeats, but hoped, like all Nigerian politicians, that a miracle could happen.

    In the run-up to the contests, all the boastful politicians had literally written, in their favour, the outcomes of the primaries of the opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), respectively.

    But when the real balloting were held by the PDP on Wednesday, January 26, and the APC on Thursday, January 27, in that order, the politicians, not short of excuses, fell like a pack of cards.

    During the campaigns for the primaries, politicians on both divides had complained about the processes being manipulated against them by the state leaders of the PDP and APC: former Governor Ayodele Fayose and Governor Kayode Fayemi.

    Specifically, the aspirants, while presenting themselves as “the best man/woman for the job” of governor, had accused the past and current governors of “anointing” their favourites, for whom they’re gaming the processes ahead of the primaries.

    The PDP aspirants alleged scheming of the congresses by Mr Fayose, to favour his protégée, Otunba Bisi Kolawole, at the primaries, and to swing the June poll for the rival APC.

    They alleged that Fayose had received a princely amount from Governor Fayemi, in order for the PDP to present “an unviable candidate,” for a “walk-over” by the APC at the June election.

    Repeated interventions by the national headquarters and South-West branch of the PDP didn’t seem to work, as the allegations continued into the primaries on January 26 in Ado-Ekiti.

    For instance, a key PDP aspirant, representing Ekiti South, Senator Abiodun Olujinmi, playing the hot-button gender card, “and an unfair resolution of matters arising from a lingering controversial congress of the party,” pulled out of the primaries before kick-off.

    In a press interview, she said the list prepared for the primary election put her at “a disadvantage,” as her local government “is left with only 12 delegates,” as decided by the party leadership.

    In other words, Olujinmi, besides seemingly relying solely on the votes of delegates from her local government, had banked on being treated specially as a female, to gain the PDP ticket. And sensing that none of her expectations would materialise, exited the poll.

    When the results of the delegate primaries were called, the sceptical aspirants’ misplaced claims to political formidability, rather than their fears, were overwhelmingly debunked.

    Fayose’s anointed candidate, Otunba Kolawole, a former member of the Ekiti State House of Assembly, who resigned as the PDP chapter chairman to contest in the primaries, trounced former Governor Segun Oni and others, including Senator Olujinmi.

    The Chairman of the Primary Election Committee and Governor Udom Emmanuel of Akwa Ibom, declared Kolawole as the winner of the election, having polled 671 votes against 330 votes by Chief Oni, who placed second.

    While former Deputy Governor to Fayose and PDP’s candidate in the 2018 polls, Prof. Kolapo Olusola, came third with 93 votes, Adewale Aribisala scored 56 votes, Kayode Adaramodu 10 votes, Kazeem Ayodeji six votes, Olujimi two votes, and the remaining four aspirants ostensibly got their self-cast ballot of one vote each.

    Oni, who succeeded Fayose in his first coming as governor between 2003 and 2006, rejected the results, on the grounds that the delegates’ register was mutilated and many delegates’ names were missing from the register.

    Slamming the results, the Director-General of the Segun Oni Campaign Organisation, Mr. Yemi Arokodare, accused Governor Emmanuel of threatening to “arrest and lock up some 32 “automatic delegates,” even as the governor “deliberately” allowed Fayose “to sit in the hall after he has voted,” a situation, Arokodare said, was against the rules earlier pronounced by Emmanuel.

    “Udom (Emmanuel) allowed aides of Fayose to sit in the hall purposely to intimidate other delegates,” Arokodare said, alleging, as Chief Oni had done prior to the primaries, that Fayose was chairman of the primary committee that oversaw Emmanuel’s election in Akwa Ibom, and that the Ekiti PDP primary poll was “a payback for Ayo Fayose. “It’s a similar story in the APC, but more intriguing, as seven of the eight aspirants pulled out in the morning of the primaries, over alleged manipulation of the processes in favour of Mr. Biodun Oyebanji, reportedly backed by Governor Fayemi.

    The primaries were almost a repeat of the 2018 experience, in which political thugs, engineered by aspirants, who smelt defeat at the poll, disrupted the franchise, with security agents deployed to the venue standing by while the mayhem persisted.

    So, the big guns, who called for the stoppage and cancellation of the primaries, were trounced by Oyebanji, immediate past Secretary to Ekiti State, who resigned to contest in the primaries.

    The results, as announced by the Chairman of the Primary Election Committee and Governor Abubakar Badaru of Jigawa State, showed that Oyebanji won in all 16 local government areas of Ekiti, securing 101,703 votes from the 107,877 accredited members.

    The breakdown of the results for other aspirants are as follows: Sen. Opeyemi Bamidele, 760 votes; Mr. Femi Bamisile, 400; Mr. Kayode Ojo, 767; Sen. Adedayo Adeyeye, 691; Mr. Bamidele Faparusi, 376; Mr. Ademola Popoola, 239 and Chief Oluwasola Afolabi, 47 votes in the “Option A4” variant of direct primary adopted for the poll.

    Governor Badaru expressed shock that the aspirants boycotted the primaries he said were free and fair, noting that, “as we have earlier promised, we have ensured a level-playing ground for all aspirants.”

    He denied allegations by the aspirants that they weren’t consulted, saying that 20 names each were submitted by the aspirants, “and added to the list of Returning Officers and they were all captured.”

    Badaru explained that a meeting between the committee and the aspirants, slated for the primary morning, was cancelled “because there was security report that the venue was tensed,” and the committee called for security assistance to arrest the situation.

    As winners and losers in the PDP and APC await intervention of their parties’ Appeals Committees, either to approval or cancel the balloting, the January 26 and 27 primaries have indicated that when “push comes to shove,” many politicians are mere paper tigers.

    Consider the performances of Chief Oni, Senator Olujinmi, Chief Adeyeye and Mr Bamisile (who vigorously canvassed zoning the governorship to Ekiti South), hiding under nebulous allegations of hijacking and manipulation of the processes, to boycott and/or reject the primaries they’d vowed they’re the aspirants to beat.

    Particularly noteworthy is Governor Fayemi’s acceding to the agitation for direct primaries in the APC, mostly championed by Senator Bamidele, who expressed optimism that the contest would be credible, only to join six other aspirants to shun the voting.

    Finally, the primaries have revealed that there’re “real kingmakers” in Ekiti politics in Mr Fayose and Governor Fayemi. Though Fayose, as incumbent, had “anointed” Prof. Olusola in 2018, it’s the backing, out of power, for Otunba Kolawole that’s proved his political mettle.

    Similarly, Dr Fayemi’s crowing of himself as candidate of the APC in 2018 was largely ignored, but this time, he’s deployed the power of incumbency to produce a candidate, who, like Fayose’s candidate, might receive the crown jewel in the June 2022 poll.

     

    * Mr. Ezomon, Journalist and Media Consultant, writes from Lagos, Nigeria.

  • Forcing APC’s convention via protestations – By Ehichioya Ezomon

    Forcing APC’s convention via protestations – By Ehichioya Ezomon

    By Ehichioya Ezomon

    The ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) has literally become a “Fuji house of commotion” where nothing seems to work in the quest to hold a national convention, to elect new party leaders.
    A plethora of lawsuits at different jurisdictions across the country didn’t work to prompt the dissolution of the Governor Mai Mala Buni-led Caretaker/Extraordinary Convention Planning Committee (CECPC) and pave way for conduct of the convention.
    It’s also a no-show for the series of protests at state chapters, and national headquarters of the APC in Abuja, and a routine bashing by the opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), for failure to convoke a rancour-free convention, as the PDP did in late 2021.
    Similarly failing to move the APC leaders was the November 2021 urging by the President Muhammadu Buhari-headed National Executive Committee (NEC) to hold the convention in February.
    Apparently unhappy with the power-mongers’ efforts to frustrate reconciling the divide in the party, for a smooth convention, Buhari issued a scary prediction of APC’s defeat by the PDP in 2023.
    On resolving the issues in the APC for an orderly national convention, President Buhari, in an interview with the Nigerian Television Authority (NTA) aired on January 6, said:
    “We have a time frame. We have to work because the four-year cycle (for a general election) is constitutional. It cannot be interfered with by anybody. So, if the party (APC) couldn’t agree, then the opposition (PDP) can take over” in 2023.
    To drive home his point, Buhari recalled that failure of the PDP to put its house in order, and take serious the threats of the opposition APC to take over power, caused the party the 2015 elections.
    “What did the PDP do? the president asked rhetorically. “They said the opposition could not come together, but when ANPP, CPC, APGA (and ACN) came together (as APC), before PDP realized it, they were off; they are still off; they can see it.”
    Though Buhari’s literal apocalypse for APC returned the controverting leaders from dreamland, several meetings in Abuja couldn’t yield an outcome to satisfy APC’s members’ agitation.
    Clever politicians that they are, the chieftains partially heeded Buhari’s admonition, by insisting first on resolving the party crisis that would inevitably push the convention beyond February.
    But then came a blistering rebuke by the controversial Director-General of the Progressives Governors Forum (PGF), Salihu Moh Lukman, which he followed up with a resignation from his post.
    In a statement in Abuja on January 13, Dr Lukeman said further postponement of the convention would mean the CECPC’s “new objective is probably to take APC to its political grave,” faulting APC leaders’ craving to settle the internal crisis before the convention.
    Lukman declared: “Unless the CECPC has given itself the new responsibility of being the political and electoral undertaker of the APC, it must stop promoting some subversive campaigns suggesting that it is undertaking ‘the immediate task of addressing contestations within the party… ahead of the National Convention.’
    “The more the party continues to allow the leadership of the CECPC to continue to hold everyone captive and refuse to commence the process of organising the February APC National Convention, the more party leaders would have supported the CECPC in weakening the electoral prospect of the APC.
    “Largely on account of delaying the implementation of decision to organise the February APC National Convention, there is hardly any internal party preparation for the 2023 electoral contest beyond individual leaders declaring their personal aspirations for offices.”
    Lukman warned against allowing aspirants to define the 2023 project, rather than the achievements of the party, and the Buhari government, and thus strengthening the “false opposition narrative about the failure of APC and President Buhari.”
    “If APC wants to unassailably win the 2023 elections, it must take all the necessary steps to correct this false narrative,” he said. “This can only start happening if everyone rises to the challenge of ensuring that the CECPC faithfully implement the decision to organize the APC National Convention in February 2022. A major indicator for this would also include a review of the APC manifesto at the convention,” he added.
    As Lukman’s dissection riled the APC leadership, the governors backing the CECPC decided it’s time to give him the boot. And aware of the governors’ plot, the PGF director-general resigned.
    Yet, his message wasn’t lost on the governors, who hurried to President Buhari, and came out to declare that the February 2022 national convention was sacrosanct.
    Even at that, the governors, who are the happening guys in the system, played Jackie and Hyde over when in February the convention would hold, pushing the announcement to the very CECPC that’s the object of protestations in the party.
    Kebbi State governor and chairman of the PGF, Abubakar Bagudu, told reporters in Abuja that the forum’s decision was unanimous, and united behind the president and the caretaker committee.
    His words: “We discussed our upcoming convention, which you may recall, I had cause to address the press after we visited President Buhari in November 2021, where the president and the party agreed that the convention would take place in February 2022.
    “We took inputs about the reviews and we noted all the misrepresentations in the press that we seek to correct: that the PGF is one united body, as you can see evidently from the attendance (at the meeting).
    “We are one group of stakeholders in the party, and our party respects institutions. The appropriate organ of the party that will announce a date for the national convention is the CECPC.”
    And finally on January 18, Governor Buni announced that the APC national convention would hold in two days, on February 26 and 27, ending speculations about a further shift in the concave to elect new officers to run the affairs of the party till 2026.
    The problems in Nigeria’s polity are fueled by the wiggle room given to governors to control the structures in the state chapters of the political parties, particularly in the APC and PDP.
    For instance, in the APC (as it’s in the PDP), the governors can perform electoral magic, such as the outcomes of the congresses and/or primaries in the 2019 and 2023 election cycles, respectively, triggering recrimination in the party, and threatening not only APC’s chances to retain power in 2023, but also its existence.
    Were the governors circumspect in using their positions to deal with real or perceived opponents in the APC, they wouldn’t have the kind of issues they feverishly want to settle before the February make-or-mar national convention.
    The governors, and other APC chieftains may want to take Buhari’s advice that he’s not a kingmaker, and that there’s no shortcut to elective positions but through the party’s grassroots, whose voices must be heard from the unit up to the national stage.
    Citing himself as one “who worked hard” to become president after four consecutive elections in 2003, 2007, 2011 and 2015, the president, in the NTA interview, charged that “anyone that wants to become the next president should also work for it.”
    Buhari said: “My position is simple. I think I succeeded in trying to get my position understood in the sense that we start from bottom upwards; from polling units to wards, to local governments, to states and then to Abuja.
    “So, in all constituencies, they will know their positions, coming up. Therefore, when they come to Abuja (for the national convention), they are likely to work together. There is no kingmaker from Abuja; no constituency is being dictated to. All constituencies are supposed to produce their leadership in our party.
    “We want to make sure that our party members understand that they are respected. It (choosing party officials) is from polling unit, to ward to local government, to state and to Abuja. So, those who want to be elected at any level, let them work for it. Nobody is going to appoint anybody.”
    Heeding this counsel will ensure a smooth national convention, acceptable primaries, and survival of the APC beyond Buhari’s tenure in office. Time is over for gambling with the party’s future!

     

    Mr. Ezomon, Journalist and Media Consultant, writes from Lagos, Nigeria.

  • APC’s emergency rule shenanigans in Edo – By Ehichioya Ezomon

    APC’s emergency rule shenanigans in Edo – By Ehichioya Ezomon

    By Ehichioya Ezomon

    The December 2021 call by the All Progressives Congress (APC) for a declaration of a state of emergency in Edo State portrays the opposition party in the “Heartbeat of the Nation” as an unserious contender for control of the state in the 2024 governorship poll.

    Why would APC that rode to power on the promise of obedience to the rule of law want to cure defects in the system by employing means that defy democratic tenets and commonsense?

    In a 22-paragraph press conference in Benin City, the Edo chapter chairman, retired Col. David Imuse, accuses Governor Godwin Obaseki of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) of anti-democratic practice that the APC wants President Muhammadu Buhari to remedy by triggering an emergency rule in the state.

    Dr Imuse says: “Edo is the only state in Nigeria today without a functional Legislature. What is happening with the 10 PDP jokers, who gather regularly at Governor Obaseki’s office, is comical. They gather to read sheets of papers, pretending to be making laws as Edo State House Assembly. We all know the true story.

    “What Obaseki is practicing in Edo today is a democratic taboo. And when a taboo is allowed to exist for too long, it becomes a tradition. If this taboo is allowed to be exported to other States, it will endanger our democratic culture. Edo is in a serious trouble.

    “We therefore call on the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as a matter of urgent national importance, to declare a STATE OF EMERGENCY IN EDO so that we can truly have a proper sole administrator.”

    The Edo APC needs reminded that emergency rule isn’t a tea party at the behest of politicians craving to get to power through the back door, but a constitutional matter to prevent or arrest a breakdown of law and order in parts of or in the entire country.

    While call for emergency rule is a throwback to the era of misuse of federal powers to destabilize subnational entities in the First Republic and in the first eight years of the PDP administration from 1999 to 2007, President Muhammadu Buhari doesn’t seem to fancy the fiat, to solve actual or concocted problems in the states.

    If it were so, a couple of PDP states with governors critical of the president and his government, and several APC and PDP states with serious security problems, would’ve had their governors and democratic institutions replaced with sole administrators.

    Such states are Benue and Rivers, with Governors Samuel Ortom and Nyesom Wike as thorns in Buhari’s flesh; and Anambra, Benue, Borno, Imo, Kaduna, Katsina, Niger, Oyo, Sokoto, Taraba and Zamfara with cumulative security issues that’ve claimed thousands of lives, billions worth of property, and turned millions of Nigerians into Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) in and outside Nigeria.

    A state like Ondo, whose governor, Chief Rotimi Akeredolu (SAN), gave a quit notice to armed herdsmen occupying forests in the state, and terrorizing indigenous communities, would’ve had a state of emergency declared in it “for challenging federal authority.”

    But the Buhari regime hasn’t lifted a finger, in the hope that a combination of factors, including persuading the states to consider incorporating outdated pastoral practices, would solve the frequent clashes between herders and farmers that’ve snowballed into unprecedented banditry and kidnapping across the country.

    What’s actually APC’s case against Governor Obaseki and his government to warrant the call for an emergency rule in Edo? According to Imuse, “there are several reasons why a state of emergency has become inevitable in our beloved State.”

    He lists them, as follows:

    *Contrary to his oath of office, Obaseki can no longer secure life and property of Edo citizens.

    *With his “clandestine” borrowing of billions of Naira, Edo has become the second most indebted state in Nigeria.

    *He disregards the Rule of Law and court orders except those in his favour.

    *Demolishes public and private property, including the Central Hospital, Benin City.

    *Turns himself into a maximum ruler, by appropriating the powers of the three arms of government.

    *Unable to protect the lives of Edo people, despite claiming to spend N2 billion on a security trust fund.

    *Spends his second term in office playing politics, neglects governance, and fails to appoint a full cabinet.

    *Signs or enters into MOUs, partnerships and agreements with individuals and organizations that will outlive his government, and leave behind stillborn projects.

    *Fails to employ qualified personnel to fill thousands of vacant spaces, and wastes Edo resources in harmonizing the PDP via frivolous appointments to members.

    *Obaseki fails to probe, and recover money stolen through a project, which benefits his company, Afrinvest, with a huge commission.

    Col. Imuse notes that while Governor Obaseki claimed to have spent the last five years laying the foundation for the development of Edo State, the APC “cannot find any of such foundation stones.”

    “It is in the light of the precarious situation Edo State has found itself under Governor Obaseki, which is almost akin to anarchy, that the All Progressives Congress, APC, is calling on the Federal Government to declare a state of emergency in Edo,” Imuse says.

    “Our call is predicated on the fact that Mr. Obaseki would prefer to be a Sole Administrator of Edo State rather than a democratically-elected governor. With a state of emergency, his present disposition towards governance will be legitimized. He would not need a legislature, cabinet or even local government chairmen to function.

    “… a state of emergency in Edo will have a multiplier effect on the various apparatus of government in such sectors like (the) civil service, health, education, and security of lives and property, among several others, which are all presently in dire need of leavening. We also believe that a state of emergency will be a proactive step to flatten the curve of bad governance the state is now suffering.”

    The woes Imuse has leveled against Governor Obaseki are such that advocates of real democratic practice would frown at, and seek to challenge their perpetration through legally and morally-accepted means, such as a redress in the law courts.

    But Nigeria’s amended 1999 Constitution grants Obaseki (and other governors) immunity against criminal cases, such as levied by Imuse, in the discharge of his duties as Governor of Edo State.

    Yet, the APC can take out civil writs against alleged misdeeds by the government, on which the courts can award damages, and impose injunctions to prevent further breaches by the state. That’s the reasonable course, without recourse to antics that state of emergency rules have become for democratic despots.

    Ahead of the 2024 governorship contest, the Edo APC should change its tactics from wanting a back-channel into the Dennis Osadebey Avenue Government House, in Benin City.

    Rather, the party should deploy alleged mis-governance of the Obaseki administration to woo Edo voters to its column, and stand a chance to sing the victory song in 2024. Otherwise, the gnashing of teeth of defeat in the platform will continue. Enough of emergency rule shenanigans!

     

    *Mr Ezomon, Journalist and Media Consultant, writes from Lagos, Nigeria.

  • Electoral Bill: Don’t worry, NASS can’t bite – Ehichioya Ezomon

    Electoral Bill: Don’t worry, NASS can’t bite – Ehichioya Ezomon

    By Ehichioya Ezomon

    Nigerians shouldn’t worry about the National Assembly (NASS) overriding President Muhammadu Buhari’s veto of the Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill 2021. And the Presidency doesn’t need to blackmail or coerce the NASS to shelve the voyage of discovery.

    This is because the NASS “does not have the liver” to contemplate, or attempt to override Buhari’s latest refusal to sign the piece of legislation that promises credible electoral processes.

    Outspoken Governor Nyesom Wike of Rivers State had risked a bet that the NASS members, for lack of courage and strength of character, wouldn’t strike down Buhari’s veto of the Bill.

    What were members to do in the circumstance? Override the president’s veto, or rework the Bill, as Buhari has requested, by removing the “offending” provision for direct primaries.

    But when the chips were down, and urgent action needed to make the legislation become an Act implementable, especially for the February 2023 general election, the NASS members proved Wike right by hurriedly closing plenary for holiday till January 18, 2022.

    Most troubling is that the initiative to embark on vacation began in the House of Representatives, which played a pivotal role in the late insertion of the provision for direct primaries in the Bill.

    In particular, Nigerians would recall how House Speaker Femi Gbajabiamila led the debates on direct primary election he says is germane to the processes of advancing democracy in Nigeria.

    In Lagos on December 30, Gbajabiamila relived his push for direct primaries, saying: “If you follow the history of the amendment of the direct and indirect primary bill, I initiated that amendment bill for a good reason, and it is for people to participate in elections.

    “These are the people you see around when you campaign every four years: come rain, come shine. For me, it does not make sense that these people do not have a voice in who represents them. It is part of being used and I didn’t like that.

    “One of the ways to reform the system is to make it more accountable and to make the people have a voice in who represents them as opposed to a few people sitting in the four corners of a wall (room) and writing results. That’s what the amendment was about.”

    As the Bill was in abeyance, Gbajabiamila visited the Aso Rock Villa, in Abuja, to acquaint Buhari with the importance of direct primaries to mass participation by mostly youths in the electoral process.

    Yet, when prompt action was expected on the Bill, Gbajabiamila balked, and hit the gavel to suspend plenary for a full month, for members to embark on holiday while the polity reels in turmoil.

    According to him, the time was short to address the Electoral Bill in haste, as members must pass other important bills, such as the 2022 Appropriation Bill and the Finance Bill before vacationing.

    The Senate is also guilty of stalling the Bill, but Senate President Ahmad Lawan tried to steer the Upper Chamber into looking at the issue in two sittings before joining the House in the holiday binge.

    The Senate was locked in several closed sessions. At a stage, members reportedly “gathered over 73 signatures” to override Buhari’s veto. But the speculations remained in those realms!

    Left in the lurch, Senator Lawan declared that as a two-chamber assembly, the Senate couldn’t take a second look at the Electoral Bill without the House. So, he proclaimed a one-month holiday.

    On the behind-the-scenes session by members, Lawan said: “The Senate… discussed how to respond to the letter from Mr. President on the electoral bill amendment. The Senate consequently resolved to consult with the House of Representatives in January when both the Senate and House will be in session.

    “Presently, the House of Reps has gone on recess and like we all know, the constitutional provision is for the Senate and House of Representatives to jointly take the appropriate action.”

    Again, Gbajabiamila has inelegantly intervened in the Bill impasse, giving an inkling that the House might foreclose direct primaries, and go against public clamour for Buhari’s veto to be overridden.

    Idiomatically-proverbial, he said: “When we come back, the House will look at those amendments. We will sit as the National Assembly, look at the reasons, and consider removing that clause and pass the bill so that we do not do away with the baby and the bath water.

    “But then, it is not my decision to make. It is the decision of the National Assembly. If they determine that the reasons are not good enough, then, there is a process prescribed by the constitution.

    “They need 2/3 of the members to override the president. There is a reason the constitution prescribes 2/3; veto is not something you easily override.

    “If they muster enough and they believe it is in the best interest of Nigerians, then, that is what we will do; otherwise, we will take out the clause and pass the bill so that Nigerians can have a credible electoral act and due process. They must get it.”

    Seizing on the obvious volte face by members of NASS, and the likelihood of not overriding Buhari’s veto, the Presidency has turned the tables on the legislators, accusing them of attempting to foist a dangerous Bill on the country.

    Senior Special Assistant to the President on Media and Publicity, Malam Garba Shehu, in a statement on December 28, stated that “… the President will do whatever he can to protect this country’s democracy, and that includes withholding assent from this Bill.”

    “These amendments have been presented as a means to enhance and build upon our democratic processes. After careful review, the President’s Office has found that the opposite is true,” Shehu said.

    “Rather, the proposed amendments entail significant legal, financial, economic and security consequences for all Nigerians, principal among which would be a severe spike in the cost of holding primary elections by parties – integral to democracies the world over.

    “To those that would rather that limited public funds be spent on politicking during this time of global crisis, we say: cease these cynical games. Tell the Nigerian people openly what you want. Put your – or rather their – money where your mouth is.”

    Attorney General and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami (SAN), who opposes direct primaries from the onset, took the debate further on the cost implications to government bankrolling political party primaries and the 2023 elections.

    Estimating politicians to be 60 million of Nigeria’s population of over 200 million, Malami says it’s unfair to the 160 million non-politicians to spend N305 billion on INEC’s duties for 2023 polls, and N200 billion to conduct primaries by the 18 political parties.

    The Minister, in a phone-in programme on Radio Kano, monitored in Abuja, asked rhetorically: “Are you fair to the 160 million Nigerians using their wealth just to conduct primary election to produce a party candidate, despite other demands by the public?

    “My answer to this is that, to spend this N305 billion that will be given to the INEC and the about N200 billion to be given to the political parties is not fair to the remaining 160 million Nigerians who have no business about politics and political appointments.”

    While the guessing and waiting game continues in the lead-up to the 2023 polls, the question maybe asked: What’s the guarantee that the president will assent the Bill if the NASS were to effect the changes that Buhari has required?

    That triggers another poser by critics: That the object of the attacks on direct primaries is located elsewhere, particularly in the provision for electronic transmission of poll results by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)!

    That the eleventh-hour insertion of direct primaries in the Bill was a ploy to get President Buhari to withhold his assent, so as to thwart the implementation of electronic transmission of election results!

    So, as Buhari reportedly stated, the floating of direct primaries is a conspiracy by governors and NASS members to abort electronic transmission of poll results. But then, their quest appears in tandem with the expectation of the Presidency.

    From the manner it’s hammering on the “dangers” posed by the Electoral Bill to the polity, the governors and NASS members may’ve unwittingly sanctioned the bidding of the administration.

    What’s glaring is that with or without opposition to direct primaries, the government seems unenthusiastic about the Electoral Bill that Buhari has repeatedly turned down, and which the NASS members haven’t grown some balls to advance its processes.

     

    Mr. Ezomon, Journalist and Media Consultant, writes from Lagos, Nigeria.

  • COVID-19: Isn’t chloroquine stop-gap ‘saviour’?, By Ehichioya Ezomon

    COVID-19: Isn’t chloroquine stop-gap ‘saviour’?, By Ehichioya Ezomon

    By Ehichioya Ezomon
    Since China first identified the novel coronavirus on its shores in December 2019, the world has been living on hope for a drug or vaccine for the treatment and prevention of the pandemic.
    But that hope has been unrealised due to several factors, chiefly the relatively unknown nature of the virus caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), and the fact that drugs and vaccines cannot be produced overnight.
    Producing drugs and vaccines takes time because they have to undergo clinical trials, which, in the case of a vaccine, could take two years at the earliest or never really achieved, for instance, vaccines for HIV and dengue till date.
    Insistence by scientists on “proper” clinical trials during outbreaks frustrate many around the world, especially leaders and relatives of sick people, who want administered any “touted” drugs. That’s the case with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).
    The “efficacy” of Chloroquine/Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin is being plied as “very promising” for the treatment of coronavirus, though the drugs are produced to combat other diseases.
    A switch to these drugs is what Maurice Iwu, a Nigerian Professor of Pharmacognosy, describes as “repurposing” – “using a drug known for something else for some other things.”
    Despite studies done in China, France, Germany and the United States on the drugs, as suitable to treat COVID-19, scientists warn of the danger they pose to patients: those with pre-existing ailments, such as hypertension, diabetes and cancer.
    For instance, in March 2020, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), in the United States, gave its nod for the use of the drugs to treat coronavirus patients in the hospital.
    A report by Politico.com noted that “hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have been linked with serious heart rhythm problems, especially when paired with the antibiotic, azithromycin.”
    On Friday, April 24, the FDA had to iterate its warning, stressing that “to decrease the risk of life-threatening heart problems, patients should only use the medication in hospital settings.”
    Yet, absent a definitive drug(s) – even as vaccine experimental trials are ongoing – chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin have come in handy in COVID-19 hard-hit countries.
    As posted on WhatsApp by a Nigerian biochemist, Emeka Orjih, on March 24, there’s increased use of chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, particularly in the U.S., and he endorsed the adoption of the same drugs in Nigeria.
    Mr Orjih, resident in Abuja, tracked the shipment of the drugs to the U.S. thus: “Four days ago, the largest pharmaceutical company in Germany, Bayer, donated 3 million doses of chloroquine to the U.S. government to aid the fight against COVID-19.
    “Not to be outdone, Novartis, the 3rd largest pharmaceutical company on earth, donated 130 million doses of hydroxychloroquine. Israel followed suit, with its largest pharmaceutical company, Teva, donating 16 million doses of hydroxychloroquine.
    “The giant pharma, Mylan, quickly reopened its closed West Virginia (U.S.) factory to produce only hydroxychloroquine, with a promise to deliver the first 50 million doses in a few weeks. All of this happening in a space of 72 hours.”
    On their efficacy, Orjih wrote that: “Both drugs have been used on thousands of COVID-19 patients in China, France and Germany with very successful outcomes. China, the epicentre of COVID-19, recorded 3,200 deaths so far.
    “What has not been publicised is that China recorded over 73,100 recoveries – people that were positive for COVID-19 but fully recovered. The major treatment that led to those 73,100 recoveries was chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine.”
    He said with the right dose – (“maximum dosage for chloroquine: 500mg 2 times a day for 10 days, while for azithromycin it is 500mg on the first day and 250mg for the next 4 days”) – hundreds of thousands of lives could be saved.
    Against medical advice, Orjih recommended self-medication to Nigerians because “we are in dire times that need quick action and quick results, else life could become death.” But he’s a caveat: “You DO NOT, for any reason, exceed the maximum dosage, as this could also easily lead to death,” as “chloroquine is poisonous.”
    Enter Dr Zev Zelenko of Monroe in New York, U.S., who claimed to use hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin and Zinc sulfate, to treat 500 COVID-19 patients without “deaths, hospitalisations and intubations” (the insertion of a tube into the body).
    Based on his “success,” Dr Zelekno said he wrote an open letter to President Donald Trump and medical professionals around the world, “alerting them to a possible solution to the coronavirus.” Below is a summary of his combo therapy:
    “My out-patient treatment regimen is as follows: * Hydroxychloroquine 200mg twice a day for 5 days; Azithromycin 500mg once a day for 5 days; and Zinc sulfate 220mg once a day for 5 days.
    * My team has treated approximately 350 patients in Kiryas Joel and another 150 patients in other areas of New York with the above regimen.
    * Of this group and the information provided to me by affiliated medical teams, we have had ZERO deaths, ZERO hospitalizations, and ZERO intubations.
    * In addition, I have not heard of any negative side effects other than approximately 10% of patients with temporary nausea and diarrhoea.”
    Interestingly, Dr Zelenko said he developed the following “treatment protocol” in a pre-hospital setting: * Any patient with shortness of breath, regardless of age, is treated. * Any patient in the high-risk category, even with just mild symptoms, is treated. * Young, healthy and low-risk patients, even with symptoms, are not treated (unless their circumstances change and they fall into category 1 or 2).”
    Coming to Nigeria, the Chief Medical Director (CMD) of the University College Hospital (UCH), Ibadan, Prof. Jesse Otegbayo, who tested positive in late March 2020, said he treated his viral infection with chloroquine.
    In an interview, Otegbayo said: “I took chloroquine based on recommendation by my physician. I have studies that have shown the efficacy of chloroquine.”
    Still, he will not recommend his remedial treatment to others, as he believes his cure was by the “grace of God, his strong immunity, no underlying disease, and a low viral load.”
    He said: “I will not say that what I took (Chloroquine, Vitamin C-1000 and fruits) will work for another person,” adding, “until research is done and these are proven, we cannot recommend.”
    Nonetheless, shouldn’t relevant medical authorities in Nigeria test and commence treatment of COVID-19 patients with this cocktail, to arrest the pandemic before it overwhelms the country that’s topped 1,000 in infection and scores in death? It’s time to act!
    * Mr. Ezomon, Journalist and Media Consultant, writes from Lagos, Nigeria.

  • Worrying APC, PDP boycott of council polls, By Ehichioya Ezomon

    By Ehichioya Ezomon

     

    In advance of the 2019 general elections, a trend has developed along with the rush to conduct local government council elections across the states: That’s the tendency of political parties to boycott those elections on rather nebulous excuses.

    For instance, of the elections conducted since late 2017 in eight states, four were outrightly boycotted by the two leading parties in Nigeria: the All Progressives Congress and the Peoples Democratic Party.

    While the APC spurned the elections in Ekiti (and withdrew midway into the balloting in Akwa Ibom), the PDP abdicated participation in Osun, Kano and Edo states. Already, the PDP is planning to ditch the council elections in Oyo in May. Ditto the APC in Rivers in June.

    The big question: Will the APC and PDP pass up the 2018/2019 elections in the states they snubbed during the council elections? For starters, will the APC evade the governorship poll in July in Ekiti, and the PDP doing the same in Osun in September?

    Perhaps, the implications of this trend are not lost on the Chairman of the APC, Chief John Odigie-Oyegun, who would rather the PDP abandon the rest of the elections in 2018 and 2019. He was reacting to PDP’s dumping of the March 3 council polls in Edo.

    To him, however low a political party rates its chances, participating in election is an “opportunity to mobilise and energise its followers,” failing which “the injury is to the boycotting party,” adding that, “from our history in this country, you do not boycott elections. If you do so, you are paying a heavy price for it and we wish it (PDP) luck. But I pray that they will boycott the others also.”

    Certainly, Chief Odigie-Oyegun isn’t “earnestly yearning” for the PDP to shun the polls in 2018 and 2019, but he’s only expressing indignation that a political party that prides itself as the “largest in Africa” could abandon elections at the grassroots.

    Ironically, in the rush to judgment, the APC chair failed to allude to his party’s pulling out of the council elections in Ekiti, not once but twice in two years – in December 2015 and 2017, respectively. And to think that the APC is the dominant political party in the country!

    It’s not unusual, though, for political parties to shun elections, especially at the national level, if they stand no chance of winning any seat that would qualify them to exercise political or administrative authority. This necessitates the calls to give recognition to parties, that so desire, to operate only at the zonal, state or council level.

    Political parties adduce various reasons for ducking council elections: from the seemingly genuine, such as having legal issues with the State Independent Electoral Commissions (SIECs), to the tenuous and downright ludicrous.

    For example, the Ekiti chapter of the APC withdrew from the December 19, 2015 council polls on the allegation that officials of the EKSIEC were card-carrying members of the PDP, and as such “they could not be trusted to conduct a credible election.”

    Then in last December’s polling, the party had recourse to its ongoing legal action against the EKSIEC, promoting that it could not participate in an exercise conducted by an “unlawful body.”

    In Edo, the PDP vowed non-participation due to “lack of confidence in the EDSIEC,” and urged voters to shun the exercise. It also challenged, at the state High Court, the “unlawful amendment of the notice of election, from 90 to 45 days, by the House of Assembly.”

    Even in council elections that are earmarked for May and June in Oyo and Rivers, the main opposition parties in the states have given notice of their opting out of the voting. What are their reasons?

    The APC in Rivers has cases against the leadership of the local government councils, which have run through the courts – High Court, Appeal Court and Supreme Court, and the “constitutionality of the RSIEC Law 2018” being litigated at a Federal High Court.

    So, in bowing out of the council polls in June, the Rivers APC, through its chair, Dr. Davis Ikanya, reminded the RSIEC chairman, retired Justice Chukwuneye Uriri, that there’s “no vacuum” in the local governments, as the councillors’ tenures had not expired.

    The Oyo chapter of the PDP is “boycotting” the May council polls on the advice of a chieftain of the party in the state, Prince Adeyemi Saheed Arowosaye, who alleged that “information available to me” indicated that “the state government has perfected plans to rig the election in favour of the ruling All Progressive Congress.”

    Actually, the fear of the controlling party, using its state governor and the SIEC to “manipulate” the system, is the beginning of wisdom for the opposition party to boycott council polls. Such abracadabra manifested in virtually all the states that had held elections in recent times.

    To quote former Senator Domigo Obende (Edo North), “Political parties do not want to participate in elections so that it will not look as if they were defeated. They want the easy way out and to say, ‘We did not participate in the elections; otherwise, we would have won.’”

    But the boycotters beware: Surrendering council polls undercuts a political party’s viability for the next big elections: State House of Assembly, Governorship, and National Assembly and Presidential elections.

    According to the chairman of the Edo chapter of the APC, Mr. Anslem Ojezua, the decision of a political party to boycott council elections “is as good as signing its death certificate.”

    So, haven’t the APC and PDP signed their “death certificates” in states they dodged council elections? Well, the Ekiti governorship in July and in Osun in September will likely show how wise both parties were in ditching the states’ council elections. Expedite

     

    * Mr. Ehichioya Ezomon, Journalist and Media Consultant, writes from Lagos, Nigeria.